I'm not sure there's that much difference in the exposure and support unless one is in the U.S. and is a skating fan. Despite their achievements, Meryl and Charlie aren't household words in the U.S. because skating isn't that popular here, and most American skating fame goes to ladies' singles skaters anyway. I suspect that Canadians in general are more supportive of their figure skaters, and besides, V/M won an OGM in a "hometown" Olympic Games. There was even a coffee-table book about Tessa and Scott, full of photos and biographical info. I've never seen so much as a magazine cover featuring Meryl and Charlie, let alone a book.

Be that as it may, in the skating world, these two splendid couples are almost equally praised and admired, and almost equally gifted and accomplished, though different in some aspects, and it sometimes seems as if one could toss a coin to decide which one should win in a particular competition. This alone will make the season even more tense! Nothing is really a shoe-in at this stage, it seems.

I for one am growing my nails EXTRA long, because I'm sure I will have none left by the time that gold medal in Sochi is awarded...

Reminds me of a great line from the Willy Wonka movie: The suspense is killing me. I hope it will last.

You don't know these people personally any more than I do. You have no idea how hard they train or what does or doesn't affect their training. I was merely stating my opinion, which is just as valid as yours. You have been around a long time but clearly haven't read many of my posts- I am a huge fan of both D/W and V/M and while I currently prefer D/W I have followed V/M AVIDLY since their junior years, and they remain one of 5 skaters/pairs that I have been a huge fan of immediately, with no persuasion needed. I don't think an injury is an 'excuse' in sports or that we should pretend V/M are improving because she is injured. They aren't improving anything but their presence on the ice, IMO- something they were already great at. Whatever the reason, V/M have stagnated, at least somewhat. D/W have not. I never said anything about who deserves to win, who is better overall, etc. I merely said V/M haven't improved much lately, and I stand by it. Maybe that's due to her injuries, in whole or in part. I don't think it matters. The best team on a given day deserves to win.

I don't think any pretending is necessary. The idea that V/M have not improved or stagnated is simply ludicrous. Let's look at this:

- lifts: V/M have made ever more complicated, innovative lifts every year. They are all new every year. They have the most incredible positions, and paint shape pictures with their bodies. Tessa is stronger now physically (arms, core, etc.), and they are capable of much more now than they were in Vancouver.

- twizzles: Again, V/M create new variations every year. The way they enter, exit and play with the music is DIFFICULT, and they have improved their overall stability, speed and ice coverage over the last 4 years. They used to be much less stable, and prone to more errors.

- spins: V/M have improved the speed of their spins, all the while incorporating them even more into the music.

- step sequences: This has always been a huge strength of V/M. No one matches lines, holds, edges like V/M. Over the last 4 years they have improved the overall speed of these, while demonstrating more complexity and difficulty and even more musicality. They did this so well in their program 2 seasons ago that it looked effortless and the ice dancers who were commentators made a special point of showing exactly how difficult and incredible what they were doing really was. It only looked easy. And last year was a whole new level.

- with regard to PCS, they have demonstrated increasing maturity, more complex choreography, a full range of emotions from the drama of last year to the characters of 2 years ago, to the latin expression before. This is a much more mature and seasoned V/M than the sweet kids who won Vancouver. They have taken excellence and built colour, depth, and just more of quality and speed and difficulty and musicality.

I also think it is time we gave the "poor injured, fragile Tessa" idea a rest. I know it feeds nicely into the narrative that somehow V/M are weaker and struggling, and by extension therefore not as good as their rivals. It's just not true. She had some serious issues. She dealt with them. She changed her whole skating technique in the last 4 years, as well as her off ice and on-ice routine. (That in itself is simply incredible!) She is strong and healthy, and they've never looked so happy and relaxed. When I look back to pictures of Vancouver, she looks really thin (too thin), and they both look really young. They now both look like gorgeous, healthy, vibrant all-grown-up young adults.

I also think it is time we gave the "poor injured, fragile Tessa" idea a rest. I know it feeds nicely into the narrative that somehow V/M are weaker and struggling, and by extension therefore not as good as their rivals. It's just not true. She had some serious issues. She dealt with them. She changed her whole skating technique in the last 4 years, as well as her off ice and on-ice routine. (That in itself is simply incredible!) She is strong and healthy, and they've never looked so happy and relaxed. When I look back to pictures of Vancouver, she looks really thin (too thin), and they both look really young. They now both look like gorgeous, healthy, vibrant all-grown-up young adults.

I've also seen some V/M fans (not you, N. Dancers) used Tessa's injury to downplay the improvement/achievements made by Meryl and Charlie in this quad. I've seen posts that say something to the effect of "Meryl and Charlie's World Championship (in 2011) was only possible because Tessa and Scott weren't able to compete a full season because of her injury."

Or something to the effect that "Meryl and Charlie's improvements and progress is a result of being healthy. If Tessa was also healthy, their improvements would be exponentially higher." Or "Meryl and Charlie were able to play catch up because of Tessa's injury."

So I've seen the injury issue work both ways, honestly.

Personally I admire all of them for rising above their personal injuries and struggles to get to the top. I think it's great, as you pointed out Northern Dancers, that Tessa has learned to work and thrive despite her injury rather than be defeated by it.

Ultimately, I think everyone has their own reasons for preferring one team over another, and that's fine. But as far as competition goes, they are neck and neck and as many other mentioned, that who gets OGM in Sochi really comes down to who performs the very best that day.

- twizzles: Again, V/M create new variations every year. The way they enter, exit and play with the music is DIFFICULT, and they have improved their overall stability, speed and ice coverage over the last 4 years. They used to be much less stable, and prone to more errors.

Really? To each their own then, I guess.

V/M's twizzles have always been the standard for me, and still is. The way their twizzles are aligned so perfectly centered and controlled (without any shifting of the upper body/shoulders), not to mention superior ice coverage they have on this element puts them ahead of any other team currently. For those who want to see V/M do the 2-set twizzles rather than the 3-set, they already have mastered this back in the last quadrennial where they were the first team to achieve the maximum score on this element (Olympic FD). They've now moved on to try newer twizzles, namely the 3-set kind where they, again, create slight variations each year.

D/W are still stuck on the 2-set kind that they have been doing for the past several years: there is speed there, but lacking the control and ice coverage aspect. Sometimes it looks like they are doing the twizzles "on the spot". In general, though, D/W have been more consistent on this element than V/M in the past 2 years.

I will hazard a guess that D/W have not been doing the 3-set twizzles because they would fall right off on the third set.

To be honest this D/W and V/M argument is really tiresome old news. Honestly they give me goose bumps in fits and bursts only over the last couple of years. I hope either a rising time or a new team or a greatly improved one, any one can shake things up a bit. For me ice dance is synonymous with fashion, after a while a certain style gets stale. To me they're both sort of recycling "classic" old programs for their Olympic campaign and so I'm a bit bored with both of them. But who knows I'm open to a nice surprise now and then. Have at it I say

V/M's twizzles have always been the standard for me, and still is. The way their twizzles are aligned so perfectly centered and controlled (without any shifting of the upper body/shoulders), not to mention superior ice coverage they have on this element puts them ahead of any other team currently. For those who want to see V/M do the 2-set twizzles rather than the 3-set, they already have mastered this back in the last quadrennial where they were the first team to achieve the maximum score on this element (Olympic FD). They've now moved on to try newer twizzles, namely the 3-set kind where they, again, create slight variations each year.

Just my 2 cents.

That was kind of my point. I was disputing the idea that V/M have stagnated since Vancouver. I'm not buying it in any way. And you validated my point. Twizzles were a little more "hit or miss" for them in the distant past. They've become much more solid, stable and difficult over the last few years in my opinion. I don't think there is a team in the world who is 100% on twizzles all the time, every time.

.......I also think it is time we gave the "poor injured, fragile Tessa" idea a rest........ When I look back to pictures of Vancouver, she looks really thin (too thin), and they both look really young. They now both look like gorgeous, healthy, vibrant all-grown-up young adults.

I prefer the lithe, 2010 version of Tessa, however she is a beautiful woman, and perhaps the most engaging female ice dancer of the current era. She and Scott will be formidable competition-- and may well "take the season."

Re twizzles: The 3 set kind are neither harder nor easier than the 2 set kind intrinsically. That's why both varieties are worth level 4, when enough rotations are done cleanly, and when the upper & lower body difficult positions are correctly executed. Skaters will pick one version or the other, depending on what works for them, for whatever reasons.

Skaters that want to highlight their ability to go the whole length of the ice in a twizzle might prefer 3 sets, but also skaters that don't feel comfortable entering a twizzle from a jump might prefer 3 sets, and often skaters with significantly weaker twizzles in one direction or the other choose the 3 set option so that they can look good for 2/3 of the skill, and finish the skill well, rather than finishing in their weak direction. (This would be true for P&B for example)

Skaters who twizzle equally well in both directions might like to highlight that fact by doing only 2 sets, particularly if they can go nearly the whole length of the rink with just 2 sets, but skaters who just want to get the skill over quicker might prefer also 2 sets.

Consequently, judges do not treat the 2 set with difficult entrance as somehow easier than a 3 set option, nor do they overvalue the fact that the 2 set kind requires a difficult entrance where the 3 set kind does not.

I don't think any pretending is necessary. The idea that V/M have not improved or stagnated is simply ludicrous. Let's look at this:

- lifts: V/M have made ever more complicated, innovative lifts every year. They are all new every year. They have the most incredible positions, and paint shape pictures with their bodies. Tessa is stronger now physically (arms, core, etc.), and they are capable of much more now than they were in Vancouver.

- twizzles: Again, V/M create new variations every year. The way they enter, exit and play with the music is DIFFICULT, and they have improved their overall stability, speed and ice coverage over the last 4 years. They used to be much less stable, and prone to more errors.

- spins: V/M have improved the speed of their spins, all the while incorporating them even more into the music.

- step sequences: This has always been a huge strength of V/M. No one matches lines, holds, edges like V/M. Over the last 4 years they have improved the overall speed of these, while demonstrating more complexity and difficulty and even more musicality. They did this so well in their program 2 seasons ago that it looked effortless and the ice dancers who were commentators made a special point of showing exactly how difficult and incredible what they were doing really was. It only looked easy. And last year was a whole new level.

- with regard to PCS, they have demonstrated increasing maturity, more complex choreography, a full range of emotions from the drama of last year to the characters of 2 years ago, to the latin expression before. This is a much more mature and seasoned V/M than the sweet kids who won Vancouver. They have taken excellence and built colour, depth, and just more of quality and speed and difficulty and musicality.

I also think it is time we gave the "poor injured, fragile Tessa" idea a rest. I know it feeds nicely into the narrative that somehow V/M are weaker and struggling, and by extension therefore not as good as their rivals. It's just not true. She had some serious issues. She dealt with them. She changed her whole skating technique in the last 4 years, as well as her off ice and on-ice routine. (That in itself is simply incredible!) She is strong and healthy, and they've never looked so happy and relaxed. When I look back to pictures of Vancouver, she looks really thin (too thin), and they both look really young. They now both look like gorgeous, healthy, vibrant all-grown-up young adults.

Re twizzles: The 3 set kind are neither harder nor easier than the 2 set kind intrinsically. That's why both varieties are worth level 4, when enough rotations are done cleanly, and when the upper & lower body difficult positions are correctly executed. Skaters will pick one version or the other, depending on what works for them, for whatever reasons.

Skaters that want to highlight their ability to go the whole length of the ice in a twizzle might prefer 3 sets, but also skaters that don't feel comfortable entering a twizzle from a jump might prefer 3 sets, and often skaters with significantly weaker twizzles in one direction or the other choose the 3 set option so that they can look good for 2/3 of the skill, and finish the skill well, rather than finishing in their weak direction. (This would be true for P&B for example)

Skaters who twizzle equally well in both directions might like to highlight that fact by doing only 2 sets, particularly if they can go nearly the whole length of the rink with just 2 sets, but skaters who just want to get the skill over quicker might prefer also 2 sets.

Consequently, judges do not treat the 2 set with difficult entrance as somehow easier than a 3 set option, nor do they overvalue the fact that the 2 set kind requires a difficult entrance where the 3 set kind does not.

Well, say what you like, when you are stuck with one move for several years, don't blame people to call you one trick pony. That just shows your lack of ability IMHO.

Re twizzles: The 3 set kind are neither harder nor easier than the 2 set kind intrinsically. That's why both varieties are worth level 4, when enough rotations are done cleanly, and when the upper & lower body difficult positions are correctly executed. Skaters will pick one version or the other, depending on what works for them, for whatever reasons.

Skaters that want to highlight their ability to go the whole length of the ice in a twizzle might prefer 3 sets, but also skaters that don't feel comfortable entering a twizzle from a jump might prefer 3 sets, and often skaters with significantly weaker twizzles in one direction or the other choose the 3 set option so that they can look good for 2/3 of the skill, and finish the skill well, rather than finishing in their weak direction. (This would be true for P&B for example)

Skaters who twizzle equally well in both directions might like to highlight that fact by doing only 2 sets, particularly if they can go nearly the whole length of the rink with just 2 sets, but skaters who just want to get the skill over quicker might prefer also 2 sets.

Consequently, judges do not treat the 2 set with difficult entrance as somehow easier than a 3 set option, nor do they overvalue the fact that the 2 set kind requires a difficult entrance where the 3 set kind does not.

I totally agree with Doris. If you did 4 sets of twizzles, you would definitely cover more ice than 1 set. Distance traveled by 1 set of twizzles x number of sets = ice coverage. The arguments about less ice coverage with two sets of twizzles are quite laughable. Of course, it is going to be less due to the fact it has one less set!! A twizzle is not a spin.

There is only one way to find out and answer this question. Book a ticket to Detroit and go to the Arctic Edge Skating Club and watch.

If a skater/couple are a world champion or have been, chances are they are far from lazy. Both teams must have a pretty strong working ethic...but I don't know! I've never seen them train...it would be awesome to see though!

I have not read through the V/T thread so perhaps I missed something, but I don't see where Moment said anyone was lazy. I think what Moment meant was, there is less incentive to improve if you are already receiving perfect marks (whether deserved or not). I recall in a highschool business class (or was it law? - I had the same teacher for both), I had obtained a perfect 10 score on an assignment. However the teacher deducted one point on the grounds that nobody was perfect. At least he publicly announced his reason to the entire class.

In any case, I think the skater's incentive to work harder is not so much the exact scores, but rather their closest rivals. In D/W case, V/M are the incentive to improve more (and vice-versa). Neither wants to lose. Without V/M, would D/W have been pushing themselves as hard (and vice-versa)? The fact that they train at the same rink further encourages more improvement, since they can see what their rivals are doing daily. It likely would have been hit & miss if they had been training at different facilities.

ETA: I suppose receiving perfect scores could deceive skaters into thinking they are now untouchable by their closest rivals. But I don't think either D/W or V/M are egotistical enough to believe that.